If for nothing else our Kick off return team needs someone back there as a threat and I think this year you can get a decent running back in round 2. We've got questions galore with the backs we got on the team right now. I like Watson but he's a backup, Dorsey's fumbles make you worry a little, Rudi even if he gets those legs together is on downhill side. Here's some guys that should be sitting there at round 2 and theyre all very very good.

Positives: Jones is a highly elusive outside runner. He scored four times in three years as a kickoff returner and averaged 31.3 yards per KR as a junior. Having playing behind Darren McFadden since 2005, Jones' legs are fresh. He makes one cut and gets vertical in a hurry. Jones flashed soft hands, good route running, and homerun ability after the catch at Arkansas.

Negatives: Jones is inexperienced as an every-down back and is not developed physically. He is small and could be run over by blitzing linebackers and strong safeties in the pros. Jones is a gambler and can be streaky as a ball carrier.

Verdict: Jones measured in at the Combine two inches shorter than his college listing. While there's little means to guage how he might fare as a future starter, his lack of an ideal build to fill out is discouraging. It's not out of the question that he will be something more, but the odds favor Jones having a career as a complementary piece, not a lead back.

Positives/Negatives: From a straight-line standpoint, Johnson may be the fastest player in the NFL as a rookie. The four-year starter was used often as a slot receiver at ECU and catches the ball exceptionally well downfield. Few, if any, NFL defenders will tackle him from behind. A game breaking kick returner, Johnson led the nation in all-purpose yards per game as a senior (227.7). However, he had neck surgery in spring 2006 and missed a start that year with turf toe. He lacks good strength and is not an inside runner. Johnson is considered poor in pass protection and put the ball on the ground too much in college.

Verdict: He has a stringbean frame and isn't as elusive as Reggie Bush, who's failed as an every-down back in the pros. Johnson can be used in a number of ways, which increases his value, but is unlikely to ever be a full-time starter. Durability is a big concern. Johnson can be an explosive weapon, but his lack of ideal size and strength makes him no more than a change-of-pace/return prospect.

Positives/Negatives: Charles can be a dancer behind the line of scrimmage, especially in short-yardage situations. He had fumbling issues throughout his Longhorns career and they cost him a chance to start in 2006. Charles has elite, galloping speed and burst, but isn't a punisher. His lean frame and high running style can leave Charles susceptible to big hits. He was an All Academic Big 12 honoree, so intelligence isn't an issue.

Verdict: Charles gave up track and improved markedly as a junior, but there are question marks about his ball security, size, and staying power in the NFL after an up-and-down college career. Somewhat like Chris Henry in 2007, Charles appears to be a boom-or-bust prospect that may never see the field consistently if he puts the ball on the ground in practice as a pro

I think the RB's you mentioned are good, but not good enough to justify ignoring the other holes on the team.

I really hope the Bengals don't waste another early pick on a RB. They have more pressing needs: DL, LB, OL, TE, etc. They have plenty of RB's, especially if Perry or Irons comes back healthy. Average RB's are a dime a dozen. The Bengals will be able to get one later in the draft or from someone else's trash. They've proven time and time again that don't know what they're doing drafting RB's early. Carter got hurt, but was extremely soft. Perry was a luxury pick that was wasted. Last year, they needed someone on defense instead of Irons. Build up the trenches so anyone could be the RB.

NorrisHopper30

03-09-2008, 11:13 AM

Get McFadden first round and Jones 2nd round.

Hey, at least our offense will be exciting!

But, really..if we sign McCree, a LB and another D-lineman or 2 AND McFadden is on the board in the first round, I TAKE IT. The kid is better than Adrian Peterson imo.

chicoruiz

03-09-2008, 11:36 AM

Round 2? I'll go further than that, and say that if Ellis and Dorsey are both gone by our round 1 pick, I'd seriously consider taking Mendenhall. Especially if we can trade down a few picks and still get him.

WMR

03-09-2008, 12:07 PM

D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D

That is all.

Buckeye33

03-09-2008, 12:31 PM

But, really..if we sign McCree, a LB and another D-lineman or 2 AND McFadden is on the board in the first round, I TAKE IT. The kid is better than Adrian Peterson imo.

McCree signed with the Broncos yesterday.

GoReds33

03-09-2008, 01:46 PM

I'd go for defense in the first two rounds, and look for a tight end in the third. After that it would be a tossup. I'd love to get more defense, but we also need more offensive linemen too.

icehole3

03-09-2008, 02:16 PM

D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D

That is all.

no need to reach for draft picks, after the 2 best DLs go to me all bets are off the table. I say second round because after that round you may as well wait till the fourth or fifth round and just grab who's there. Second round you get real value with the backs that are there.

LoganBuck

03-09-2008, 02:33 PM

If Fred Davis, TE USC, is there in the second round I give him a long look, otherwise it is all defense in the first three rounds.

CrackerJack

03-09-2008, 03:08 PM

If Fred Davis, TE USC, is there in the second round I give him a long look, otherwise it is all defense in the first three rounds.

Yeah that would be nice. But you have to put yourself in the mind of the Bengals - they always go for their value/high ceiling skill position pick in Rd 2. It won't be a CB this year at least. And this franchise never seems to draft TE's before the 3rd round - ever. (although I think they need to start doing that as well as drafting more interior 0-lineman on day one).

Think RB, WR, LB or FS in the 2nd.

camisadelgolf

03-09-2008, 03:21 PM

If I were the Bengals, here's how I would try to draft:
1st Round: defensive tackle (or defensive end if Dorsey and Ellis are gone)
2nd Round: linebacker (would you really count on Brooks, Thurman, and/or Pollack to perform at a high level for an entire year?)
3rd Round: wide receiver (Chad and T.J. aren't getting any younger, and the third receiver is Chris Henry)
4th Round: center or offensive tackle (offensive line depth is needed)
5th Round: cornerback (the current lineup is Leon Hall, Johnathan Joseph, and pray it's a running play)
6th Round: tight end (the need for a pass-catching tight end is exaggerated every year and could probably be addressed in free agency, but if not, there's probably someone worth taking a flyer on)
7th Round: a 'project' on the offensive or defensive line; someone with a big, athletic body who has yet to have shown what he can do with more advanced coaching

chicoruiz

03-09-2008, 03:39 PM

Boy, I don't know...Watson isn't really starter material, Perry and Irons are injury concerns, and Dorsey's more of a third-down guy. If you don't get a running back pretty early, you're pretty much betting your season on Rudi Johnson, a guy who has taken a lot of pounding the last few years and sure looked worn out last year.

With Odom, Geathers and Faanene on the roster, why reach for a DE in round 1? If the DT isn't there, I'd think about taking a LB, and I'd also think about Mendenhall. He'd change the whole offense.

camisadelgolf

03-09-2008, 03:58 PM

I like the idea of the Bengals taking a LB in the first round, but I'd prefer to see them trade down and pick up an extra pick to do so.

icehole3

03-09-2008, 04:54 PM

you really want Mike Brown making a trade that works out after the success we're having in free agency? I dont know if he can pull it off correctly.

Buckeye33

03-09-2008, 05:00 PM

If Dorsey and Ellis are gone by the 9th pick, I really think the Bengals just need to go to the best player available theory.

If Keith Rivers is your BPA then, then take him. If it's Mendenhall, take him. If it's McKelvin or Mike Davis then take one of them.

I just don't think the Bengals should reach at #9 and take Derrick Harvey just because they think they have to pick a D line.

icehole3

03-09-2008, 05:38 PM

I agree with that, no need to reach just grab your RB or whoever is there on the board, you need good solid talent...Mendenhall is a top 10 guy so is Stewart, I'd like to grab a guy (RB) in round 2 but all the draft boards have about 10-12 guys that are standout type of guys after that its all bets are off and everybodys pretty close to one another. They can come back to defense in round 2. The thing is if a offensive guy falls in your lap grab him and go on. A Mendenhall or McFadden should be scooped up.

camisadelgolf

03-09-2008, 05:40 PM

If Dorsey and Ellis are gone by the 9th pick, I really think the Bengals just need to go to the best player available theory.

If Keith Rivers is your BPA then, then take him. If it's Mendenhall, take him. If it's McKelvin or Mike Davis then take one of them.

I just don't think the Bengals should reach at #9 and take Derrick Harvey just because they think they have to pick a D line.

I agree with that for the most part, but at this point, I think it would be a better call to reach for a defensive end than to take a cornerback in the first round a third year in a row.

icehole3

03-09-2008, 06:30 PM

the thing is say you grab a DE Harvey or who else Merling or Groves even Rivers, I dont think theyll crack your lineup...Harvey, Merling and Graves arent game changers like one of the RBs could be if theyre there McFadden or Mendenhall.

KoryMac5

03-09-2008, 09:16 PM

If a really good back is their and he is the best available player than you select him.

Redhook

03-09-2008, 09:54 PM

I don't buy taking the best player available in the NFL draft. If a great QB was there would you draft him with Carson on the team? No, you'd draft someone else or trade down. I really like McFadden, but I don't want the Bengals drafting him if he's there. The Bengals must take the best defensive player in the front 7. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. They have no choice.

CTA513

03-09-2008, 10:10 PM

3rd round is probably the earliest I would consider drafting a running back.

chicoruiz

03-09-2008, 10:51 PM

The Bengals must take the best defensive player in the front 7. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. They have no choice.

Sure they do. They have every choice in the world. If they decide they've got enough money tied up at DE with Geathers and Odom, they have the choice not to take a DE. Or they might figure that with a top-ten pick they need to draft a difference-maker whatever the position, then use their remaining day 1 picks to fill their needs.

I think history shows that passing up a superior player in round 1 to draft for need often blows up in your face. And I think RB is a major area of need. I think it's highly questionable how much tread Rudi has left on his tires, and I think that an offense that could control the ball better would have a beneficial effect on the defense.

But I'm hoping that Dorsey or Ellis slips to #9 and makes this argument moot.

Buckeye33

03-09-2008, 10:58 PM

I don't buy taking the best player available in the NFL draft. If a great QB was there would you draft him with Carson on the team? No, you'd draft someone else or trade down. I really like McFadden, but I don't want the Bengals drafting him if he's there. The Bengals must take the best defensive player in the front 7. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. They have no choice.

I understand your reasoning on not taking a QB if that was the best player available, but in the Bengals situation (besides QB) they do not have one position that they can clearly say that they are set.

If you were the Bengals and your big board had Mendenhall #1 by a lot, Clady, McKelvn, and Rivers in that order at the top when your pick came up, you'd take the #4 guy just because he plays LB?

I can understand taking D only if the players left when the pick came up were all scouted as equals, but if neither DT is there at #9, you have to take the player that you think can help yor team the most in the future. This team doesn't have the luxury of a team like San Diego, who have depth at every position.

Redhook

03-10-2008, 10:48 AM

If you were the Bengals and your big board had Mendenhall #1 by a lot, Clady, McKelvn, and Rivers in that order at the top when your pick came up, you'd take the #4 guy just because he plays LB?

I hear you hummin'. I understand your point, but I don't trust the Bengals "big board", and I believe with the #9 pick you should be able to get a great defensive player. The Bengals must get more defensive help.

I can understand taking D only if the players left when the pick came up were all scouted as equals, but if neither DT is there at #9, you have to take the player that you think can help yor team the most in the future. This team doesn't have the luxury of a team like San Diego, who have depth at every position.

They should trade the pick then. They need a lot more on defense than they do on offense. I don't trust the quantity of If's at LB and their front 4 is questionable at best. I really wouldn't mind them trading down to get an additional pick later in the draft.

Buckeye33

03-10-2008, 12:40 PM

I hear you hummin'. I understand your point, but I don't trust the Bengals "big board", and I believe with the #9 pick you should be able to get a great defensive player. The Bengals must get more defensive help.

They should trade the pick then. They need a lot more on defense than they do on offense. I don't trust the quantity of If's at LB and their front 4 is questionable at best. I really wouldn't mind them trading down to get an additional pick later in the draft.

I totally agree that the Bengals need defensive help, and hopefully Dorsey or Ellis are there making these arguments moot.

I also hope that if Ellis and Dorsey are gone that they can trade down. I'm always in favor of trading down as long as you get good value in the trade. If by some miracle, McFadden is there at #9 and you can get Jerry Jones to give up his 2 #1 picks this year then that would be great.

But if you don't trust the Bengals big board, how can you trust them to trade down and get value?

KoryMac5

03-10-2008, 12:50 PM

If McFadden falls to 9 (which he won't) and the Bengals don't take him it will be one of the biggest draft day blunders in history. Remember the last time we passed on a franchise running back for defense, Justin Smith went 4 and LT went 5.

WVRed

03-10-2008, 01:29 PM

I don't buy taking the best player available in the NFL draft. If a great QB was there would you draft him with Carson on the team? No, you'd draft someone else or trade down. I really like McFadden, but I don't want the Bengals drafting him if he's there. The Bengals must take the best defensive player in the front 7. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. They have no choice.

You take the best player available based on need. However, that does not mean that you take the best player at a set position.

Balmer and Harvey are reaches at 9, while McKelvin fills a position that is really not a need. Phillips fills a need, but his stock is falling. Clady is there and is the best player of everyone available, and with Willie on the verge of a full breakdown, you take him.

Best player available to fill a need.

For the record, if I substituted Clady with Mendenhall, I would probably take Mendenhall. And I would weather the character issues and take McFadden.

TeamSelig

03-10-2008, 11:48 PM

I think you go BPA and if it doesn't fit within the position you trade down for depth. Obviously, you will target areas of need, but might as well get the most value possible.

bucksfan2

03-11-2008, 09:55 AM

Here is my thing with RB's. There isnt that much of a drop off when you go later in the rounds. Look at the draft when Ronnie Brown, Cadillac Williams, and Benson went early in the draft. None of those backs have separated themselves from the pack. All were considered top picks but the value isn't there. In reality what is the difference between Mendenhall and Slaton? They probably will be separated by 3-4 rounds and it isn't out of the question that Slaton will be a better back.

I think you go with a DT in the first. I think either Ellis or Dorsey will be there at 9. If somehow McFadden slips to 9 I get on the phone with Dallas and say what are you offering? 2nd round I look LB at Lofton from Oklahoma. The Bengals should have two picks in the third and I look at TE and DB. I would find it interesting to see what happens if a guy like DeShawn Jackson slips to their second rounds slot. I also wonder if they take a chance on a high talent guy who has slipped because of character flags.

BuckeyeRedleg

03-11-2008, 01:06 PM

Here is my thing with RB's. There isnt that much of a drop off when you go later in the rounds. Look at the draft when Ronnie Brown, Cadillac Williams, and Benson went early in the draft. None of those backs have separated themselves from the pack. All were considered top picks but the value isn't there. In reality what is the difference between Mendenhall and Slaton? They probably will be separated by 3-4 rounds and it isn't out of the question that Slaton will be a better back.

Ronnie Brown has indeed separated himself from Benson and Caddy. If not for his fluke injury he has a big time year in 2007. He was on pace to be a top 3 back (stat-wise).

And as a Buckeye fan I'm sure you saw Mendenhall in action a few times, right? I don't see how anyone can question the difference between Slaton and Mendenhall. Mendenhall is a premier back. Just because there has been bad draft years at RB, where the top RB's drafted have struggled, should have no bearing on this year. You could say the same for a number of positions. There is always going to be disappointments. It's just that when a highly drafted RB fails, it's more apparent, because they are at a highly visable position, especially to the common fan.

bucksfan2

03-11-2008, 04:04 PM

Ronnie Brown has indeed separated himself from Benson and Caddy. If not for his fluke injury he has a big time year in 2007. He was on pace to be a top 3 back (stat-wise).

And as a Buckeye fan I'm sure you saw Mendenhall in action a few times, right? I don't see how anyone can question the difference between Slaton and Mendenhall. Mendenhall is a premier back. Just because there has been bad draft years at RB, where the top RB's drafted have struggled, should have no bearing on this year. You could say the same for a number of positions. There is always going to be disappointments. It's just that when a highly drafted RB fails, it's more apparent, because they are at a highly visable position, especially to the common fan.

Maybe Brown had but now he is coming off major major knee surgery so the difference he had put in between himself and the other two backs has evaporated. Its not fair but it comes with the position and you have to take that into consideration. How many RB's in the league now would you say are better than Willie Parker? If you were to do an even swap how many guys would you be able to trade Parker for? Parker was an undrafted FA and stacks up the best RB's in the league.

I have seen Mendenhall play quite a bit and he was a stud in college. It is yet to be seen whether Mendenhall will be a stud at the next level. Heck if you looked at Slaton after his soph season he could have been one of the earlier RB's off the board.In the 2005 NFL Draft when three RB's went in the first five picks the two more successful RB's went in the 3rd and 4th rounds in Frank Gore and Barber respectively.

IMO in today's NFL RB has become a position by committee. Their isn't a great difference between the top backs and the lesser hyped backs. I just feel it is foolish for the Bengals to waste a top pick on a position that isn't in that great of need. DT, S, DE, LB are all greater positions of need than RB.

camisadelgolf

03-11-2008, 04:14 PM

Some, including me, might say that Willie Parker's success is largely due to being a product of the Steelers' offensive line.

Redhook

03-11-2008, 04:14 PM

IMO in today's NFL RB has become a position by committee. Their isn't a great difference between the top backs and the lesser hyped backs. I just feel it is foolish for the Bengals to waste a top pick on a position that isn't in that great of need. DT, S, DE, LB are all greater positions of need than RB.

Well said.

BuckeyeRedleg

03-11-2008, 04:57 PM

Maybe Brown had but now he is coming off major major knee surgery so the difference he had put in between himself and the other two backs has evaporated. Its not fair but it comes with the position and you have to take that into consideration. How many RB's in the league now would you say are better than Willie Parker? If you were to do an even swap how many guys would you be able to trade Parker for? Parker was an undrafted FA and stacks up the best RB's in the league.

I have seen Mendenhall play quite a bit and he was a stud in college. It is yet to be seen whether Mendenhall will be a stud at the next level. Heck if you looked at Slaton after his soph season he could have been one of the earlier RB's off the board.In the 2005 NFL Draft when three RB's went in the first five picks the two more successful RB's went in the 3rd and 4th rounds in Frank Gore and Barber respectively.

IMO in today's NFL RB has become a position by committee. Their isn't a great difference between the top backs and the lesser hyped backs. I just feel it is foolish for the Bengals to waste a top pick on a position that isn't in that great of need. DT, S, DE, LB are all greater positions of need than RB.

I also don't believe that the Bengals should take a RB early in this draft. My point was that if a team has a need at RB, they should not overlook a serious talent like Mendenhall or Stewart. The odds are that both won't be stars, but any position drafted early could have those same odds.

I also took issue with you lumping Ronnie Brown in with Caddy and Benson. Both Benson and Caddy have two of the bigger RB disappointments not named Chris Perry. Ronnie Brown had a solid 2006 and then played half a season last year (before his injury) and was on pace for a Steven Jackson-like year (stat-wise). Hardly comparable to Benson (3 YPC) or Caddy Williams.

I also agree with camisadelgolf that Willie Parker is an overrated back that has thrived behind a great line. I get your point though, and I'd counter that every position has undrafted players that end up as pro bowlers. That doesn't mean you take that position for granted in future drafts. It's all about a particular team's needs and although I agree a RB would not be in the Bengals best interests, it might be for another team and they shouldn't pass up a gamebreaking RB simply because others have failed before them.

KoryMac5

03-14-2008, 12:58 AM

Latest mock draft from Rivals.com has the Bengals selecting:

The Pick: Rashard Mendenhall, RB, Illinois*
The buzz: The Bengals could surprise here and add a well-rounded feature back to balance out their offense.